UAW endorses anti-auto industry candidate
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,029
Originally posted by 90rocz
How about you're right to "Due Process"...under the Patriot Act, there's a very LIBERAL use of the term terrorist, you'd be surprised how things like "Going Out on Strike" would be considered "Domestic Terrorism"...for that you can be "deported", held indefinitely, and executed by a millitary tribunal...(Read the Patriot Acts...sickening..) Obsurd as it sounds, it's right there in Black & White"...
How about you're right to "Due Process"...under the Patriot Act, there's a very LIBERAL use of the term terrorist, you'd be surprised how things like "Going Out on Strike" would be considered "Domestic Terrorism"...for that you can be "deported", held indefinitely, and executed by a millitary tribunal...(Read the Patriot Acts...sickening..) Obsurd as it sounds, it's right there in Black & White"...
If you want to talk treason, let's talk about all things Clinton...
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,180
From: Yadkinville, NC USA
Originally posted by guionM
I have very very grave questions about Bush's economic policy. I also think he's letting Cheney run him into the ground. While I also think we were more than justified for invading Iraq (remember, Hussein was a guy that defied the world and shot at our planes for years!), instead of being like his father in going in doing the job, and getting out, and letting the UN go in & set up a new government, we're sinking something like a billion $$$ per day doing something the UN should be paying for and doing themselves.
Kerry on the other hand, isn't perfect. But there is enough about him that's making me take a serious look. Anyone who has been in a war isn't going to send troops off to war on a whim (Teddy Roosevelt won a Nobel Peace prize, Kennedy ignored calls to invade Cuba, possibly averting a nuclear war, George Bush I exhausted all diplomatic avenues before we went into dessert storm, and John McCain by the standards of most so called "conservatives" isn't exactly a "blow 'em up" Republican).
But I think someone who: opposes tax increases or tax cuts that favor millonaires, doesn't give a crap what you do behind closed doors as long as you don't feel the need to rub my face with it, doesn't view moving jobs overseas as "good for the economy", thinks the government should never ever spend more than what it takes in, doesn't care about your nationality as long as you're hard working and honest, believes in helping those that can't help themselves, feels government shouldn't legislate anything that interferes with the indivual, and would have MOST DEFINATELY used nuclear weapons against Al Queda when we knew where they were in Afghanistan, and when finished there, would probally have no problems getting Iraq to let inspectors in (saving countless billions of US dollars & pretty much forcing other mid-east countries to rein in terrorists), can not exactly be labeled a "Liberal".
A Jeffersonian Libertarian bully, a moderate Republican, a Democrat that would never make it through their Presidential primaries, or a crazy who should never be allowed into elective office, maybe.
Liberal?
Naaa.
I have very very grave questions about Bush's economic policy. I also think he's letting Cheney run him into the ground. While I also think we were more than justified for invading Iraq (remember, Hussein was a guy that defied the world and shot at our planes for years!), instead of being like his father in going in doing the job, and getting out, and letting the UN go in & set up a new government, we're sinking something like a billion $$$ per day doing something the UN should be paying for and doing themselves.
Kerry on the other hand, isn't perfect. But there is enough about him that's making me take a serious look. Anyone who has been in a war isn't going to send troops off to war on a whim (Teddy Roosevelt won a Nobel Peace prize, Kennedy ignored calls to invade Cuba, possibly averting a nuclear war, George Bush I exhausted all diplomatic avenues before we went into dessert storm, and John McCain by the standards of most so called "conservatives" isn't exactly a "blow 'em up" Republican).
But I think someone who: opposes tax increases or tax cuts that favor millonaires, doesn't give a crap what you do behind closed doors as long as you don't feel the need to rub my face with it, doesn't view moving jobs overseas as "good for the economy", thinks the government should never ever spend more than what it takes in, doesn't care about your nationality as long as you're hard working and honest, believes in helping those that can't help themselves, feels government shouldn't legislate anything that interferes with the indivual, and would have MOST DEFINATELY used nuclear weapons against Al Queda when we knew where they were in Afghanistan, and when finished there, would probally have no problems getting Iraq to let inspectors in (saving countless billions of US dollars & pretty much forcing other mid-east countries to rein in terrorists), can not exactly be labeled a "Liberal".
A Jeffersonian Libertarian bully, a moderate Republican, a Democrat that would never make it through their Presidential primaries, or a crazy who should never be allowed into elective office, maybe.
Liberal?
Naaa.
I don't know... but I think I actually wrote this!
Either that, or I have just found my twin I never knew I had!
Helluva post guionM - helluva post.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,180
From: Yadkinville, NC USA
I live dead indaharta North Carolina - definitely a Republican state. I have well over 100 firearms in my collection - yes, I LOVE guns! I am a VERY well-paid engineer, working for a company that was founded in 1882 - a very "conservative" company. I don't owe money for anything but my real estate/home. I pay cash for my cars. So from time-to-time, I vote for a Republican.
Likewise, I actually need a little land to hunt on (using the guns, ya know?). I value my education, since I worked my **** off to get it. I use the internet every day. I think healthcare should be a priority for every American Citizen, regardless of their income. I can't spend 874 times what I earn each year, and I don't think the government should either. I have to pay my bills on time, and I think the government should too. I think that soldiers and sailors should get more than $10,000 a year for putting their lives on the line daily - especially in cases like Iraq right now. I also don't think that our military should be used as some fancy "police department on steroids" - they should be protecting US sovereign soils - PERIOD. For these reasons, I tend to poke a hole in the Democratic slot once in a while.
As for the Iraq issue - I have NO PROBLEM WHATSOEVER with taking Saddam down - NONE. But I have a HUGE problem with being lied-to about why it was done. I would have voted to take Saddam down in an instant, based solely on his record of genecide against the Kurds in the North, his treatment of general citizens, his corrupt policies in everything from medicinal distribution to the oil-for-food program, etc. But don't LIE to me, and tell me he is a threat to me because of WMD, or he financed 9/11, etc. Lastly, there are other ways to take a man out of position than to declare war on his whole nation - even forceful ways. Bottom line here - Dubya's old man should have finished the damn job the first time, back when the ENTIRE WORLD was disgusted at Saddam for invading Kuwait and lobbing SCUD missiles aimlessly at the whole of Europe. Nobody would have given a red rats *** if we'd have bombed him out then - but now, 12 years later, under falsified causes?
Bad Move IMO.
Do it, but be honest about it - don't lie.
Some general questions for anyone willing to take me on...
Would you believe me if I told you that Bush has provided 100% asylum and immunity from investigation and prosecution to ALL companies, associations, and individuals that are currently involved in construction of the oil infrastructure in Iraq, so long as they are being paid from the Iraq Development Fund set-up by his administration?
Would you have a problem with our Vice President receiving over $900k/year from his former employer while he is STILL IN OFFICE - despite it being illegal to do so?
Would it bother you to know that Halliburton (Cheney is former CEO) has received nearly $1-Billion in uncontested contracts in Iraq?
Would it bother you to know that Halliburton - under pressure from individuals - has admitted that they (their representatives in the field) have received over $6-Million in bribes and dirty money to do work in the Iraqi theater despite being under contract to do so? (They actually did repay the US government the $6.3-million already to avoid bad press - hell, they COULDN'T be prosecuted anyways.
)
Would it bother you to know that Haliburton (more precisely their division Kellogg, Brown, and Root) paid $1.64 to $1.70/gal for gas in Kuwait and Turkey, transported it into Iraq, then sold it for $.04 to $.17 per gallon to the Iraqi people, and charged our goverment - read that as we TAXPAYERS - the original $1.64 paid PLUS up to $.25/gal to transport it?!?! Estimated taxpayer burden was $65-100 Million for this "service" to the Iraqis - according to Congress, and Halliburton got it all."
Would you care to know who pulled together the main group of investors known as "The Carlysle Group", who bought-up many of the small defense contract companies during the last year of the Clinton Administration while they were almost dormant and bankrupt, then started selling them at HUGE mark-ups once the defense spending went nuts after 9/11? Funny thing too, how these companies in this holding group always seemed to be the ones that won the government contracts too - despite bidding.
I can go on-and-on, but if somebody doesn't see it by now, then more typing ain't gonna make any difference.
Look, I'm not just knocking one guy or his administration - in my opinion EVERY ONE OF THE KNOTHEADS in Washington is crooked and/or bought-out by special interest groups the day they got there. All I'm saying is that the group I see running the show right now is not making me a happy camper. I can honestly say that I am NO BETTER OFF today than I was 3.5 years ago on parity basis, and in fact I think I'm a little WORSE-off due to the increased cost of health care, lack of employment in the family, the medicare/drug situation (which has hit my parents hard), the outlook for Social Security (which I doubt I will ever see anyways - that's just my money given away IMO), and the current state of our governmental finances - namely the National Debt.
For those of you who "feel safer" because of some magic blanket you think Bush has thrown over us all, I have a real wake-up call for you - individually, we are no safer now than we were on Sept 10, 2001. We are all just living with additional procedures and intrusions, violations of our personal effects, monitoring of our communications, and subjecting ourselves to unjustified detention and scrutiny - to make us FEEL better.
One last thing...
regarding the Patriot Act - it flies STRAIGHT IN THE FACE of the 4th amendment to the constitution, and trods heavily on the First, Second, and Fifth amendments too. The Patriot Act basically gives any officer at any level the right to detain, search, seize, and execute restraint or arrest on ANYONE that they deem is suspiscious of activities that appear to be of a terrorist nature. That's a vague and subjective law if I've ever heard one. I don't want some donut-headed, Barny Fife twin making his mind up that me going bird-hunting in a field looks like a terrorist activity because I have a gun, then throwing me in jail for some undisclosed amount of time. But BY THE NEW LAW - HE COULD DO JUST THAT. They can also monitor your mail, email, phones, bug you, tap you, follow you, and enter your home - all without your permission or even being told. If you are a crook - great, if you are a common man doing nothing wrong - BULLSH1+!!!
The founding fathers of our country provided for us to be secure from such subjective process in the 4th amendment - stating that there must be probable cause to search and seize, and such cause must be justified by Oath, and advanced permission given by a magistrate or officer of the court before such action can be done. Let me help you out... here's the 4th -
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. "
If you guys want to give up your sovereign rights inch by inch, one at a time - Great. But do me a favor - save yourself the time of waiting, and me the trouble of going down with you, and simply move to a nation where these rights don't exist anyways, like the Chech Republic, Turkey, Libya, Northern Vietnam, or better yet - China. After a few years, send me a postcard convincing me of how great it is, and I'll be the first to give 'em up then and I'll even pay to move you back to the US when they (our rights) are all gone! Deal?
It's time to wake up guys... this ain't no bed of roses we are wallowing in, and it ain't no game either. This is REAL LIFE, in the REAL WORLD, and there ain't no do-overs like in a kickball game. Let's run the country like we would our own homes - honestly, fairly, healthy, clean, and financially responsible.
What I see in there now just ain't fitting the picture for me.
Likewise, I actually need a little land to hunt on (using the guns, ya know?). I value my education, since I worked my **** off to get it. I use the internet every day. I think healthcare should be a priority for every American Citizen, regardless of their income. I can't spend 874 times what I earn each year, and I don't think the government should either. I have to pay my bills on time, and I think the government should too. I think that soldiers and sailors should get more than $10,000 a year for putting their lives on the line daily - especially in cases like Iraq right now. I also don't think that our military should be used as some fancy "police department on steroids" - they should be protecting US sovereign soils - PERIOD. For these reasons, I tend to poke a hole in the Democratic slot once in a while.
As for the Iraq issue - I have NO PROBLEM WHATSOEVER with taking Saddam down - NONE. But I have a HUGE problem with being lied-to about why it was done. I would have voted to take Saddam down in an instant, based solely on his record of genecide against the Kurds in the North, his treatment of general citizens, his corrupt policies in everything from medicinal distribution to the oil-for-food program, etc. But don't LIE to me, and tell me he is a threat to me because of WMD, or he financed 9/11, etc. Lastly, there are other ways to take a man out of position than to declare war on his whole nation - even forceful ways. Bottom line here - Dubya's old man should have finished the damn job the first time, back when the ENTIRE WORLD was disgusted at Saddam for invading Kuwait and lobbing SCUD missiles aimlessly at the whole of Europe. Nobody would have given a red rats *** if we'd have bombed him out then - but now, 12 years later, under falsified causes?
Bad Move IMO.Do it, but be honest about it - don't lie.
Some general questions for anyone willing to take me on...
Would you believe me if I told you that Bush has provided 100% asylum and immunity from investigation and prosecution to ALL companies, associations, and individuals that are currently involved in construction of the oil infrastructure in Iraq, so long as they are being paid from the Iraq Development Fund set-up by his administration?
Would you have a problem with our Vice President receiving over $900k/year from his former employer while he is STILL IN OFFICE - despite it being illegal to do so?
Would it bother you to know that Halliburton (Cheney is former CEO) has received nearly $1-Billion in uncontested contracts in Iraq?
Would it bother you to know that Halliburton - under pressure from individuals - has admitted that they (their representatives in the field) have received over $6-Million in bribes and dirty money to do work in the Iraqi theater despite being under contract to do so? (They actually did repay the US government the $6.3-million already to avoid bad press - hell, they COULDN'T be prosecuted anyways.
) Would it bother you to know that Haliburton (more precisely their division Kellogg, Brown, and Root) paid $1.64 to $1.70/gal for gas in Kuwait and Turkey, transported it into Iraq, then sold it for $.04 to $.17 per gallon to the Iraqi people, and charged our goverment - read that as we TAXPAYERS - the original $1.64 paid PLUS up to $.25/gal to transport it?!?! Estimated taxpayer burden was $65-100 Million for this "service" to the Iraqis - according to Congress, and Halliburton got it all."
Would you care to know who pulled together the main group of investors known as "The Carlysle Group", who bought-up many of the small defense contract companies during the last year of the Clinton Administration while they were almost dormant and bankrupt, then started selling them at HUGE mark-ups once the defense spending went nuts after 9/11? Funny thing too, how these companies in this holding group always seemed to be the ones that won the government contracts too - despite bidding.
I can go on-and-on, but if somebody doesn't see it by now, then more typing ain't gonna make any difference.
Look, I'm not just knocking one guy or his administration - in my opinion EVERY ONE OF THE KNOTHEADS in Washington is crooked and/or bought-out by special interest groups the day they got there. All I'm saying is that the group I see running the show right now is not making me a happy camper. I can honestly say that I am NO BETTER OFF today than I was 3.5 years ago on parity basis, and in fact I think I'm a little WORSE-off due to the increased cost of health care, lack of employment in the family, the medicare/drug situation (which has hit my parents hard), the outlook for Social Security (which I doubt I will ever see anyways - that's just my money given away IMO), and the current state of our governmental finances - namely the National Debt.
For those of you who "feel safer" because of some magic blanket you think Bush has thrown over us all, I have a real wake-up call for you - individually, we are no safer now than we were on Sept 10, 2001. We are all just living with additional procedures and intrusions, violations of our personal effects, monitoring of our communications, and subjecting ourselves to unjustified detention and scrutiny - to make us FEEL better.
One last thing...
regarding the Patriot Act - it flies STRAIGHT IN THE FACE of the 4th amendment to the constitution, and trods heavily on the First, Second, and Fifth amendments too. The Patriot Act basically gives any officer at any level the right to detain, search, seize, and execute restraint or arrest on ANYONE that they deem is suspiscious of activities that appear to be of a terrorist nature. That's a vague and subjective law if I've ever heard one. I don't want some donut-headed, Barny Fife twin making his mind up that me going bird-hunting in a field looks like a terrorist activity because I have a gun, then throwing me in jail for some undisclosed amount of time. But BY THE NEW LAW - HE COULD DO JUST THAT. They can also monitor your mail, email, phones, bug you, tap you, follow you, and enter your home - all without your permission or even being told. If you are a crook - great, if you are a common man doing nothing wrong - BULLSH1+!!!
The founding fathers of our country provided for us to be secure from such subjective process in the 4th amendment - stating that there must be probable cause to search and seize, and such cause must be justified by Oath, and advanced permission given by a magistrate or officer of the court before such action can be done. Let me help you out... here's the 4th -
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. "
If you guys want to give up your sovereign rights inch by inch, one at a time - Great. But do me a favor - save yourself the time of waiting, and me the trouble of going down with you, and simply move to a nation where these rights don't exist anyways, like the Chech Republic, Turkey, Libya, Northern Vietnam, or better yet - China. After a few years, send me a postcard convincing me of how great it is, and I'll be the first to give 'em up then and I'll even pay to move you back to the US when they (our rights) are all gone! Deal?
It's time to wake up guys... this ain't no bed of roses we are wallowing in, and it ain't no game either. This is REAL LIFE, in the REAL WORLD, and there ain't no do-overs like in a kickball game. Let's run the country like we would our own homes - honestly, fairly, healthy, clean, and financially responsible.
What I see in there now just ain't fitting the picture for me.
Registered User
Joined: Feb 1999
Posts: 2,947
From: Springfield,OH. U.S.A.
...fact IS stranger than fiction...and sometimes harder to accept..
http://www.infowars.com/911_archive.htm
Exactly!.. He deserved to be "ousted" but I hate being lied to, and I'm sure the SEALS could have "taken him out" for the cost of a single bullet...and probably many lives could have been saved...
http://propagandamatrix.com/fbi_flaw...ield_staff.htm
http://www.infowars.com/911_archive.htm
I have NO PROBLEM WHATSOEVER with taking Saddam down - NONE. But I have a HUGE problem with being lied-to about why it was done.
He deserved to be "ousted" but I hate being lied to, and I'm sure the SEALS could have "taken him out" for the cost of a single bullet...and probably many lives could have been saved...http://propagandamatrix.com/fbi_flaw...ield_staff.htm
Last edited by 90rocz; Apr 3, 2004 at 12:19 AM.
Prominent Member
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 2,282
Read these......
Read these articles (there's a lot more) and tell me you...
1. Can refute them unequivocally....
2. Still think we we're simply lied to....
http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20030...1256-6822r.htm
http://www.2la.org/syria/iraq-wmd.php
http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=780
Stop believing the Democrating talking points for face value......
It's not how it always appears in the evening news.....I personally believe that Bush is taking it on the chin to protect our relationship with his buddy Putin.
Just wait for the Oil for Food investigation takes hold......you'll see who really did what they did "Just for Oil"........and it wasn't the US....
With that $0.02 of mine...I'm going back to talking about Camaros......this is a waste of bandwidth....
1. Can refute them unequivocally....
2. Still think we we're simply lied to....
http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20030...1256-6822r.htm
http://www.2la.org/syria/iraq-wmd.php
http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=780
Stop believing the Democrating talking points for face value......
It's not how it always appears in the evening news.....I personally believe that Bush is taking it on the chin to protect our relationship with his buddy Putin.
Just wait for the Oil for Food investigation takes hold......you'll see who really did what they did "Just for Oil"........and it wasn't the US....
With that $0.02 of mine...I'm going back to talking about Camaros......this is a waste of bandwidth....
Last edited by Doug Harden; Apr 2, 2004 at 06:50 AM.
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,029
Originally posted by ProudPony
regarding the Patriot Act - it flies STRAIGHT IN THE FACE of the 4th amendment to the constitution, and trods heavily on the First, Second, and Fifth amendments too. The Patriot Act basically gives any officer at any level the right to detain, search, seize, and execute restraint or arrest on ANYONE that they deem is suspiscious of activities that appear to be of a terrorist nature. That's a vague and subjective law if I've ever heard one. I don't want some donut-headed, Barny Fife twin making his mind up that me going bird-hunting in a field looks like a terrorist activity because I have a gun, then throwing me in jail for some undisclosed amount of time. But BY THE NEW LAW - HE COULD DO JUST THAT. They can also monitor your mail, email, phones, bug you, tap you, follow you, and enter your home - all without your permission or even being told. If you are a crook - great, if you are a common man doing nothing wrong - BULLSH1+!!!
The founding fathers of our country provided for us to be secure from such subjective process in the 4th amendment - stating that there must be probable cause to search and seize, and such cause must be justified by Oath, and advanced permission given by a magistrate or officer of the court before such action can be done. Let me help you out... here's the 4th -
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. "
If you guys want to give up your sovereign rights inch by inch, one at a time - Great. But do me a favor - save yourself the time of waiting, and me the trouble of going down with you, and simply move to a nation where these rights don't exist anyways, like the Chech Republic, Turkey, Libya, Northern Vietnam, or better yet - China. After a few years, send me a postcard convincing me of how great it is, and I'll be the first to give 'em up then and I'll even pay to move you back to the US when they (our rights) are all gone! Deal?
regarding the Patriot Act - it flies STRAIGHT IN THE FACE of the 4th amendment to the constitution, and trods heavily on the First, Second, and Fifth amendments too. The Patriot Act basically gives any officer at any level the right to detain, search, seize, and execute restraint or arrest on ANYONE that they deem is suspiscious of activities that appear to be of a terrorist nature. That's a vague and subjective law if I've ever heard one. I don't want some donut-headed, Barny Fife twin making his mind up that me going bird-hunting in a field looks like a terrorist activity because I have a gun, then throwing me in jail for some undisclosed amount of time. But BY THE NEW LAW - HE COULD DO JUST THAT. They can also monitor your mail, email, phones, bug you, tap you, follow you, and enter your home - all without your permission or even being told. If you are a crook - great, if you are a common man doing nothing wrong - BULLSH1+!!!
The founding fathers of our country provided for us to be secure from such subjective process in the 4th amendment - stating that there must be probable cause to search and seize, and such cause must be justified by Oath, and advanced permission given by a magistrate or officer of the court before such action can be done. Let me help you out... here's the 4th -
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. "
If you guys want to give up your sovereign rights inch by inch, one at a time - Great. But do me a favor - save yourself the time of waiting, and me the trouble of going down with you, and simply move to a nation where these rights don't exist anyways, like the Chech Republic, Turkey, Libya, Northern Vietnam, or better yet - China. After a few years, send me a postcard convincing me of how great it is, and I'll be the first to give 'em up then and I'll even pay to move you back to the US when they (our rights) are all gone! Deal?
Registered User
Joined: Nov 1999
Posts: 2,801
From: Nashville, TN
Originally posted by PaperTarget
First, wow, paranoid are we? Second, before the Patriot Act, you could be arrested and held for two days WITHOUT BEING CHARGED! The Patriot Act isn't changing anything for law abiding citizens. How has it affected you besides making you more paranoid? It probably hasn't. If you're not doing anything wrong and someone for some strange reason only you know wants to listen to your phone call, why would you care? If you want privacy, talk to them in person, lol. Third, you have less to fear from conservatives than you do from liberals. Remember Ruby Ridge? How about Waco? Hmm, Janet Reno ring any bells? How about when that Cuban family had SWAT team charge their house and put H&K MP5's to a little boy's head? And you're worried about conservatives? No, I'm worried about liberals. They're the ones that are trying to make this a socialist country and stripping our rights away one by one to do it. It used to be that majority ruled. Now it's the loudest minority group you can find. And that doesn't mean race either (I'm not racist).
First, wow, paranoid are we? Second, before the Patriot Act, you could be arrested and held for two days WITHOUT BEING CHARGED! The Patriot Act isn't changing anything for law abiding citizens. How has it affected you besides making you more paranoid? It probably hasn't. If you're not doing anything wrong and someone for some strange reason only you know wants to listen to your phone call, why would you care? If you want privacy, talk to them in person, lol. Third, you have less to fear from conservatives than you do from liberals. Remember Ruby Ridge? How about Waco? Hmm, Janet Reno ring any bells? How about when that Cuban family had SWAT team charge their house and put H&K MP5's to a little boy's head? And you're worried about conservatives? No, I'm worried about liberals. They're the ones that are trying to make this a socialist country and stripping our rights away one by one to do it. It used to be that majority ruled. Now it's the loudest minority group you can find. And that doesn't mean race either (I'm not racist).
Fact is those detentions under the Patriot Act require a judicial review. And I have yet to hear of ONE case of an innocent person being abused under the Patriot Act. I find it ironic that the ones crying out the most about loss of liberty in exchange for security are the ones (liberals) most ready to give up that same liberty for socialist ideals. I just never thought I'd see the day when left wingers were worried about the constitution....you know, the "living document" they are always trying to morph and change to fit the times.
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,029
Originally posted by Chris 96 WS6
I just never thought I'd see the day when left wingers were worried about the constitution....you know, the "living document" they are always trying to morph and change to fit the times.
I just never thought I'd see the day when left wingers were worried about the constitution....you know, the "living document" they are always trying to morph and change to fit the times.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,579
From: The Land of Pleasant Living
I remember when I was a kid, as well as now being outraged when I first heard Americans were spitting on soldiers returning from Vietnam. Well I now know who was responsible for that, and am now just as outraged that many people would like to see that man elected president. I just don't get it! The guy can't take a stand on anything, a real leader! He doesn't like outsourcing jobs, but he also doesn't mind making money from it himself though does he. If he wants that as an issue he should start in his own back yard first then he can attack everyone else. I'm not for outsourcing jobs either, but I don't make a living from it, and then bitch about it. I also don't believe we were lied to about WMD. Just because we can't touch them or see them doesn't mean they don't or didn't exist. Anyone here think Jimmy Hoffa didn't exist, or how about this anyone here believe in god? If so why, you can't touch or see them? Did you think when they pulled that rat out of his hole he would say ok I give here is where the wmd are at! No, I don't think so. There are many countries out there that are jealous of ours and how well we are doing, cus fact is we still have one of the most thriving economies in the world. And many of them would like to see us taken down. Some are open about it most are not, and actually pretend to be our friends. So would they lie and hide wmd to make us look like fools, I think so! I also think people will not be swayed either way here. We do need to stop looking to blame our gov't first though, its a dangerous time to be sure, tech is a great thing and has made for some awsome performance cars but also makes it easier to get other info that can be deadly to us all! So far my life has also not changed since Patriot Act! This is just my 2 cents, well ok maybe 3 or 4 cents but what ever!
Super Moderator
Joined: Feb 2000
Posts: 2,026
From: Japan
Originally posted by ProudPony
I live dead indaharta North Carolina - definitely a Republican state. I have well over 100 firearms in my collection - yes, I LOVE guns! I am a VERY well-paid engineer, working for a company that was founded in 1882 - a very "conservative" company. I don't owe money for anything but my real estate/home. I pay cash for my cars. So from time-to-time, I vote for a Republican.
Likewise, I actually need a little land to hunt on (using the guns, ya know?). I value my education, since I worked my **** off to get it. I use the internet every day. I think healthcare should be a priority for every American Citizen, regardless of their income. I can't spend 874 times what I earn each year, and I don't think the government should either. I have to pay my bills on time, and I think the government should too. I think that soldiers and sailors should get more than $10,000 a year for putting their lives on the line daily - especially in cases like Iraq right now. I also don't think that our military should be used as some fancy "police department on steroids" - they should be protecting US sovereign soils - PERIOD. For these reasons, I tend to poke a hole in the Democratic slot once in a while.
As for the Iraq issue - I have NO PROBLEM WHATSOEVER with taking Saddam down - NONE. But I have a HUGE problem with being lied-to about why it was done. I would have voted to take Saddam down in an instant, based solely on his record of genecide against the Kurds in the North, his treatment of general citizens, his corrupt policies in everything from medicinal distribution to the oil-for-food program, etc. But don't LIE to me, and tell me he is a threat to me because of WMD, or he financed 9/11, etc. Lastly, there are other ways to take a man out of position than to declare war on his whole nation - even forceful ways. Bottom line here - Dubya's old man should have finished the damn job the first time, back when the ENTIRE WORLD was disgusted at Saddam for invading Kuwait and lobbing SCUD missiles aimlessly at the whole of Europe. Nobody would have given a red rats *** if we'd have bombed him out then - but now, 12 years later, under falsified causes? Bad Move IMO.
Do it, but be honest about it - don't lie.
Some general questions for anyone willing to take me on...
Would you believe me if I told you that Bush has provided 100% asylum and immunity from investigation and prosecution to ALL companies, associations, and individuals that are currently involved in construction of the oil infrastructure in Iraq, so long as they are being paid from the Iraq Development Fund set-up by his administration?
Would you have a problem with our Vice President receiving over $900k/year from his former employer while he is STILL IN OFFICE - despite it being illegal to do so?
Would it bother you to know that Halliburton (Cheney is former CEO) has received nearly $1-Billion in uncontested contracts in Iraq?
Would it bother you to know that Halliburton - under pressure from individuals - has admitted that they (their representatives in the field) have received over $6-Million in bribes and dirty money to do work in the Iraqi theater despite being under contract to do so? (They actually did repay the US government the $6.3-million already to avoid bad press - hell, they COULDN'T be prosecuted anyways. )
Would it bother you to know that Haliburton (more precisely their division Kellogg, Brown, and Root) paid $1.64 to $1.70/gal for gas in Kuwait and Turkey, transported it into Iraq, then sold it for $.04 to $.17 per gallon to the Iraqi people, and charged our goverment - read that as we TAXPAYERS - the original $1.64 paid PLUS up to $.25/gal to transport it?!?! Estimated taxpayer burden was $65-100 Million for this "service" to the Iraqis - according to Congress, and Halliburton got it all."
Would you care to know who pulled together the main group of investors known as "The Carlysle Group", who bought-up many of the small defense contract companies during the last year of the Clinton Administration while they were almost dormant and bankrupt, then started selling them at HUGE mark-ups once the defense spending went nuts after 9/11? Funny thing too, how these companies in this holding group always seemed to be the ones that won the government contracts too - despite bidding.
I can go on-and-on, but if somebody doesn't see it by now, then more typing ain't gonna make any difference.
Look, I'm not just knocking one guy or his administration - in my opinion EVERY ONE OF THE KNOTHEADS in Washington is crooked and/or bought-out by special interest groups the day they got there. All I'm saying is that the group I see running the show right now is not making me a happy camper. I can honestly say that I am NO BETTER OFF today than I was 3.5 years ago on parity basis, and in fact I think I'm a little WORSE-off due to the increased cost of health care, lack of employment in the family, the medicare/drug situation (which has hit my parents hard), the outlook for Social Security (which I doubt I will ever see anyways - that's just my money given away IMO), and the current state of our governmental finances - namely the National Debt.
For those of you who "feel safer" because of some magic blanket you think Bush has thrown over us all, I have a real wake-up call for you - individually, we are no safer now than we were on Sept 10, 2001. We are all just living with additional procedures and intrusions, violations of our personal effects, monitoring of our communications, and subjecting ourselves to unjustified detention and scrutiny - to make us FEEL better.
One last thing...
regarding the Patriot Act - it flies STRAIGHT IN THE FACE of the 4th amendment to the constitution, and trods heavily on the First, Second, and Fifth amendments too. The Patriot Act basically gives any officer at any level the right to detain, search, seize, and execute restraint or arrest on ANYONE that they deem is suspiscious of activities that appear to be of a terrorist nature. That's a vague and subjective law if I've ever heard one. I don't want some donut-headed, Barny Fife twin making his mind up that me going bird-hunting in a field looks like a terrorist activity because I have a gun, then throwing me in jail for some undisclosed amount of time. But BY THE NEW LAW - HE COULD DO JUST THAT. They can also monitor your mail, email, phones, bug you, tap you, follow you, and enter your home - all without your permission or even being told. If you are a crook - great, if you are a common man doing nothing wrong - BULLSH1+!!!
The founding fathers of our country provided for us to be secure from such subjective process in the 4th amendment - stating that there must be probable cause to search and seize, and such cause must be justified by Oath, and advanced permission given by a magistrate or officer of the court before such action can be done. Let me help you out... here's the 4th -
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. "
If you guys want to give up your sovereign rights inch by inch, one at a time - Great. But do me a favor - save yourself the time of waiting, and me the trouble of going down with you, and simply move to a nation where these rights don't exist anyways, like the Chech Republic, Turkey, Libya, Northern Vietnam, or better yet - China. After a few years, send me a postcard convincing me of how great it is, and I'll be the first to give 'em up then and I'll even pay to move you back to the US when they (our rights) are all gone! Deal?
It's time to wake up guys... this ain't no bed of roses we are wallowing in, and it ain't no game either. This is REAL LIFE, in the REAL WORLD, and there ain't no do-overs like in a kickball game. Let's run the country like we would our own homes - honestly, fairly, healthy, clean, and financially responsible.
What I see in there now just ain't fitting the picture for me.
I live dead indaharta North Carolina - definitely a Republican state. I have well over 100 firearms in my collection - yes, I LOVE guns! I am a VERY well-paid engineer, working for a company that was founded in 1882 - a very "conservative" company. I don't owe money for anything but my real estate/home. I pay cash for my cars. So from time-to-time, I vote for a Republican.
Likewise, I actually need a little land to hunt on (using the guns, ya know?). I value my education, since I worked my **** off to get it. I use the internet every day. I think healthcare should be a priority for every American Citizen, regardless of their income. I can't spend 874 times what I earn each year, and I don't think the government should either. I have to pay my bills on time, and I think the government should too. I think that soldiers and sailors should get more than $10,000 a year for putting their lives on the line daily - especially in cases like Iraq right now. I also don't think that our military should be used as some fancy "police department on steroids" - they should be protecting US sovereign soils - PERIOD. For these reasons, I tend to poke a hole in the Democratic slot once in a while.
As for the Iraq issue - I have NO PROBLEM WHATSOEVER with taking Saddam down - NONE. But I have a HUGE problem with being lied-to about why it was done. I would have voted to take Saddam down in an instant, based solely on his record of genecide against the Kurds in the North, his treatment of general citizens, his corrupt policies in everything from medicinal distribution to the oil-for-food program, etc. But don't LIE to me, and tell me he is a threat to me because of WMD, or he financed 9/11, etc. Lastly, there are other ways to take a man out of position than to declare war on his whole nation - even forceful ways. Bottom line here - Dubya's old man should have finished the damn job the first time, back when the ENTIRE WORLD was disgusted at Saddam for invading Kuwait and lobbing SCUD missiles aimlessly at the whole of Europe. Nobody would have given a red rats *** if we'd have bombed him out then - but now, 12 years later, under falsified causes?
Bad Move IMO.Do it, but be honest about it - don't lie.
Some general questions for anyone willing to take me on...
Would you believe me if I told you that Bush has provided 100% asylum and immunity from investigation and prosecution to ALL companies, associations, and individuals that are currently involved in construction of the oil infrastructure in Iraq, so long as they are being paid from the Iraq Development Fund set-up by his administration?
Would you have a problem with our Vice President receiving over $900k/year from his former employer while he is STILL IN OFFICE - despite it being illegal to do so?
Would it bother you to know that Halliburton (Cheney is former CEO) has received nearly $1-Billion in uncontested contracts in Iraq?
Would it bother you to know that Halliburton - under pressure from individuals - has admitted that they (their representatives in the field) have received over $6-Million in bribes and dirty money to do work in the Iraqi theater despite being under contract to do so? (They actually did repay the US government the $6.3-million already to avoid bad press - hell, they COULDN'T be prosecuted anyways.
) Would it bother you to know that Haliburton (more precisely their division Kellogg, Brown, and Root) paid $1.64 to $1.70/gal for gas in Kuwait and Turkey, transported it into Iraq, then sold it for $.04 to $.17 per gallon to the Iraqi people, and charged our goverment - read that as we TAXPAYERS - the original $1.64 paid PLUS up to $.25/gal to transport it?!?! Estimated taxpayer burden was $65-100 Million for this "service" to the Iraqis - according to Congress, and Halliburton got it all."
Would you care to know who pulled together the main group of investors known as "The Carlysle Group", who bought-up many of the small defense contract companies during the last year of the Clinton Administration while they were almost dormant and bankrupt, then started selling them at HUGE mark-ups once the defense spending went nuts after 9/11? Funny thing too, how these companies in this holding group always seemed to be the ones that won the government contracts too - despite bidding.
I can go on-and-on, but if somebody doesn't see it by now, then more typing ain't gonna make any difference.
Look, I'm not just knocking one guy or his administration - in my opinion EVERY ONE OF THE KNOTHEADS in Washington is crooked and/or bought-out by special interest groups the day they got there. All I'm saying is that the group I see running the show right now is not making me a happy camper. I can honestly say that I am NO BETTER OFF today than I was 3.5 years ago on parity basis, and in fact I think I'm a little WORSE-off due to the increased cost of health care, lack of employment in the family, the medicare/drug situation (which has hit my parents hard), the outlook for Social Security (which I doubt I will ever see anyways - that's just my money given away IMO), and the current state of our governmental finances - namely the National Debt.
For those of you who "feel safer" because of some magic blanket you think Bush has thrown over us all, I have a real wake-up call for you - individually, we are no safer now than we were on Sept 10, 2001. We are all just living with additional procedures and intrusions, violations of our personal effects, monitoring of our communications, and subjecting ourselves to unjustified detention and scrutiny - to make us FEEL better.
One last thing...
regarding the Patriot Act - it flies STRAIGHT IN THE FACE of the 4th amendment to the constitution, and trods heavily on the First, Second, and Fifth amendments too. The Patriot Act basically gives any officer at any level the right to detain, search, seize, and execute restraint or arrest on ANYONE that they deem is suspiscious of activities that appear to be of a terrorist nature. That's a vague and subjective law if I've ever heard one. I don't want some donut-headed, Barny Fife twin making his mind up that me going bird-hunting in a field looks like a terrorist activity because I have a gun, then throwing me in jail for some undisclosed amount of time. But BY THE NEW LAW - HE COULD DO JUST THAT. They can also monitor your mail, email, phones, bug you, tap you, follow you, and enter your home - all without your permission or even being told. If you are a crook - great, if you are a common man doing nothing wrong - BULLSH1+!!!
The founding fathers of our country provided for us to be secure from such subjective process in the 4th amendment - stating that there must be probable cause to search and seize, and such cause must be justified by Oath, and advanced permission given by a magistrate or officer of the court before such action can be done. Let me help you out... here's the 4th -
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. "
If you guys want to give up your sovereign rights inch by inch, one at a time - Great. But do me a favor - save yourself the time of waiting, and me the trouble of going down with you, and simply move to a nation where these rights don't exist anyways, like the Chech Republic, Turkey, Libya, Northern Vietnam, or better yet - China. After a few years, send me a postcard convincing me of how great it is, and I'll be the first to give 'em up then and I'll even pay to move you back to the US when they (our rights) are all gone! Deal?
It's time to wake up guys... this ain't no bed of roses we are wallowing in, and it ain't no game either. This is REAL LIFE, in the REAL WORLD, and there ain't no do-overs like in a kickball game. Let's run the country like we would our own homes - honestly, fairly, healthy, clean, and financially responsible.
What I see in there now just ain't fitting the picture for me.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 13,713
From: The Golden State
Originally posted by PaperTarget
..Remember Ruby Ridge? How about Waco?
..Remember Ruby Ridge? How about Waco?
How about when that Cuban family had SWAT team charge their house and put H&K MP5's to a little boy's head?
The gun wasn't pointed to the boy's head, and the picture that is commonly refered to in the Miami Cuban community clearly shows the officer's finger off the trigger while pointing it to the unrelated fisherman the family was allowing to stay in the house, along with alot of other hangers-on. Ending the Elian Gonzales circus was one thing the government did right, and at the time even 70% of Floridians were glad that side show was over.
Prior to the seizure, most polls of the day showed the administration was being too concilitory, lacking backbone, wasting too much time in the courts, and was generally giving in to the Cuban community by dragging their feet, or being too shellshocked over Waco to do anything.
There's plenty of other examples of government misbehaving without having examples where the misbehavior-ees were as responsible or even moreso than the misbehavior-ers.
Last edited by guionM; Apr 2, 2004 at 04:49 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,029
But you're missing my point. They could have handled each situation differently. That Waco guy was a nut no doubt. And the guy at Ruby Ridge was wanted to. However, many of the people involved were innocents. The action taken against them was well overdone. They shot unarmed people. Why couldn't regular cops retrieve Elian? See what I'm saying here. It was overdone.
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 585
From: Livonia, MI
I've been seeing more and more stuff where current Republicans and former Republicans have been saying Bush/Cheney scares the hell out of them because of how secretive they are. The other thing they are saying scares them is that they have no regard for how we look in the eyes of the rest of the world, nor do they car what anybody outside their core group of supporters thinks of their decisions and policies.
Tonight there were two gentlemen on PBS talking about Bush. One worked for LBJ and the other worked for Nixon and actually did 4 months jail time for the Watergate scandal trying to protect Nixon. BOTH of them said there are a couple of things about the president that scares them. They were:
1) That Bush/Cheney are far more secretive than either LBJ or Nixon was (they both stressed that was saying ALOT). They sited Cheney's secretive creation of the energy policy as one example.
2) How aggressively they felt this administration was going after ANYBODY that says anything against them. Very, very defensive tactics.
They also brought up how odd it was that Bush has been keeping documents from the Clinton administration related to terrorism secret. I believe that just came out in the last few days. The other thing they found amusing was that Bush and Cheney would only testify to the 911 commission together. They theorized that it was because they were trying to keep their stories consistent or that Bush is only good at ready from a script and needs Cheney there to give the real in depth answers! Ha ha.
Tonight there were two gentlemen on PBS talking about Bush. One worked for LBJ and the other worked for Nixon and actually did 4 months jail time for the Watergate scandal trying to protect Nixon. BOTH of them said there are a couple of things about the president that scares them. They were:
1) That Bush/Cheney are far more secretive than either LBJ or Nixon was (they both stressed that was saying ALOT). They sited Cheney's secretive creation of the energy policy as one example.
2) How aggressively they felt this administration was going after ANYBODY that says anything against them. Very, very defensive tactics.
They also brought up how odd it was that Bush has been keeping documents from the Clinton administration related to terrorism secret. I believe that just came out in the last few days. The other thing they found amusing was that Bush and Cheney would only testify to the 911 commission together. They theorized that it was because they were trying to keep their stories consistent or that Bush is only good at ready from a script and needs Cheney there to give the real in depth answers! Ha ha.
Last edited by 94_Z28_ragtop; Apr 2, 2004 at 09:44 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Feb 1999
Posts: 2,947
From: Springfield,OH. U.S.A.
You probally don't want to use these as examples of Government gone wild. Ruby Ridge, wasn't exactly a bunch of innocents minding their own business, when suddenly shot at by FBI agents out of the blue, and Waco was a heavily armed cult in which the person running it had no qualms about having sex with 10 year olds, and had preached apocalyptic endings for him and his followers, believing he was god.
I was just going to mention those myself, in support of the opposite viewpoint. Ruby Ridge...boy I could waste an entire thread on that one...resist Tyrany and you're labeled a "Left Winger".., be willing to defend "your home" to the death, and you're crazy....??? 
Ruby Ridge and Waco have become symbols of strength and insistence that this level of tyrany doesn't happen again. I take it most people have only head the about these on the so called News, a few reads further into these and you'll see a totally different picture..
Oh, what about the "Sneak & Peak" clause... if you're suspicious, they can wait 'til you leave home, enter your home(No Warrant) and look around, find something on you, or worse, "plant" something on you, and arrest you when you return...(Patriot ActII)
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. "
I also don't believe we were lied to about WMD. Jus!...t because we can't touch them or see them doesn't mean they don't or didn't exist.
There's a great book people should read, full of legal documentation, and written by a former Naval Officer with "Security Clearance", until, after seeing how far the Gov't would go, went AWOL, and finally left the service and was nearly assasinated a couple of times...it's called:
**"Behold a Pail Horse"...**
...and should be at most GOOD bookstores, tho I warn you, you might not like what you read...but the proof IS overwhelming.
I'm not trying to make everyone believe me, you owe it to yourself and your families to search for yourself...
I'll end my debate of Bush vs Kerry on this:
My grandfather is 96 years old, a long time to live, and learn, and he said to me, "you know, in ALL my life, whenever a Rebublican has been if office, it's been hard times for the working man..."
I trust him, and from what I've seen, I know he's right...
Last edited by 90rocz; Apr 3, 2004 at 12:04 AM.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,132
From: Santa Clara, CA
Originally posted by guionM
It's pretty predictable that there would be the usual knee-jerk reaction that automatically assumes Democrats are bad and Republicans are good for the auto industry. The same thing happened when Clinton & Gore got in.
It's easy to forget that a democrat administration finally left setting speed limits up to the states, refused to raise CAFE, and kept new automotive regulations to an unprecidented minimum.
It's pretty predictable that there would be the usual knee-jerk reaction that automatically assumes Democrats are bad and Republicans are good for the auto industry. The same thing happened when Clinton & Gore got in.
It's easy to forget that a democrat administration finally left setting speed limits up to the states, refused to raise CAFE, and kept new automotive regulations to an unprecidented minimum.
Actually, it was a Republican congress that repealed federal speed limits. Clinton didn't have much choice. It was one of the items of the 1994 contract with America.
It's also obvious that it's easy to forget a republican administration is attempting to raise fuel economy standards for trucks, revised crash standards to even higher levels, & stated publically that outsourcing jobs to other countries is good for the economy.
The auto industry's biggest proponent and regulation blocker is a democrat.
Emission standards won't get any stricter than California's, I believe, but they may get a bit stricter for the rest of the country. Kerry hasn't talked about it, though, so it would come from civil servants in the EPA if it came at all.